On 24/05/2015 20:29, KI7MT wrote:
> Hi Bill,
Hi Greg,

...
>> 3) It turns out that it is easier to adjust the dial frequency to the
>> nearest configured working frequency when changing modes,
> I'm not sure what your meaning here.
These screen captures may help:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4192709/mode%20filtered%20working%20frequencies.jpg

The left is a view of the bottom left corner of the WSJT-X main window 
when JT9+JT65 mode is enabled (it would look similar in JT65 mode), the 
right is a view of the same when JT9 mode is enabled. As you can see the 
working frequencies are different and I am suggesting that when changing 
modes the dial frequency can be easily moved to the nearest one 
available for the mode selected. So in this case switching between JT65 
and JT9 could automatically switch between 14.076 and 14.078 MHz. Other 
arrangements are possible and it is all ultimately controlled by how a 
user customizes the frequency list.

Here is a screen capture of the related working frequencies maintenance 
table in setings:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4192709/mode%20dependent%20frequencies%20maintenance.png

>
>> 4) as there can, and will be, separate dial frequencies for JT65A and
>> JT9 on HF; this makes the +2 kHz check box redundant.
> I don't think I've ever used the 2Khz box, but then again, my rig has a
> variable width DSP filter. I would think, those rigs that cannot open
> their filter up past 2.4Khz would not be able to work JT65 and JT9
> anyway and the 2Khz may be just a quick shift for them.
Yes, but if switching modes change the working frequency then there 
would be no need for the +2 kHz check box.
>
>> 5) I could leave the dial frequency untouched when changing modes but I
>> can't see a compelling reason not to change it when the target mode has
>> a different working frequency.
> As far as I can tell, there's only a couple bands that share the same
> space with WSPR. As for the shared JT65 v.s. JT9 goes, seem like setting
> the rig for the JT65 frequency seems the most appropriate, but everyone
> operates a bit differently.
OK, so why do you think that the JT65 working frequency is appropriate 
for JT9 only operation?
>
>> Comments and suggestions?
>>
>> 73
>> Bill
>> G4WJS.
> 73's
> Greg, KI7MT
73
Bill
G4WJS.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud 
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to